Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 895 F.2d 1113 - United States v. Poulos

United States v. Poulos’s Empirical Analysis

895 F.2d 1113 · 1990

Citation profile

65
cited by 65 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
December 2013
most recently cited

39 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 65 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2013 · most notably Horton v. California (1990), United States v. Sturman (1991)

39 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

550199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 921 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 5812 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968) · 26 U.S.C. § 5841 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968) · 26 U.S.C. § 5845 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968) · 26 U.S.C. § 5861 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968) · 26 U.S.C. § 5871 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968)

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Texas v. Brown · Sedillo v. United States

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) that the conspiracy described in the indictment was willfully formed, and was existing at or about the time alleged; (2) that the accused willfully became a member of the conspiracy; (3) that one of the conspirators thereafter knowingly committed at least one of the overt acts charged in the indictment, at or about the time and place alleged; and (4) that such overt act was knowingly done in furtherance of some object or purpose of the conspiracy as charged.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[c]onstructive possession requires that a person knowingly have the power or the intention at a given time to exercise dominion and control over an object, either directly or through others.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “substantial 'other' incriminating evidence, combined with presence, serves to demonstrate ... constructive possession.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.